According to The Jerusalem Post, Katz “emphasized Israel’s determination to remain in security zones in Syria, Gaza, and Lebanon to protect Israel’s borders and nearby communities from ‘threats posed by jihadist forces.'”

Katz added that Israel has “never asked the US to act in our place along our borders. We are committed to protecting the residents of Israel from every threat, and that is what we intend to do.”

The conversation came a few days after Katz said that Israel won’t leave Gaza even if Hamas disarms and that it would establish three “Nahala outposts,” a type of Jewish settlement that starts as a community for IDF soldiers with the goal of turning it into a permanent civilian community.

The amendment would have removed $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing, a State Department program that provides foreign governments with funding to purchase US weapons, from the 2027 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act.

Massie’s amendment was defeated in a 104-314 vote, but more Democrats supported the effort than voted against it. A total of 103 Democrats voted yes, 98 voted no, 10 voted present, and four didn’t vote. Massie was the lone Republican to support the amendment.

Ahead of the vote, there was a split among Democratic leadership, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) saying that he would oppose it and House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (MA), the number 2 Democrat in the House, coming out in support of Massie’s amendment.

“It is truly a tribute to Senator Graham that we are at this point,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who made frequent visits to Ukraine along with Graham.

The bill would impose sanctions on Russian officials, Russian state-owned companies, and foreign firms that support Russia’s military industry. The bill would also give President Trump the ability to impose a 100% tariff on countries that purchase Russian energy, down from the 500% tariffs that were part of a bill Graham and Blumenthal were pushing last year.

Congressional aides told Reuters that the top five purchasers of Russian oil are China, India, Slovakia, Hungary, ⁠and Azerbaijan, and the top five buyers of Russian natural gas are China, France, Japan, Hungary, and Belgium.

“Jews do not use children’s blood for rituals,” Leiter said. “Jews do not poison wells. And Jews do not starve populations or commit genocide.”

The smear in this common Zionist talking point is obvious: Those who accuse the Israeli government belong in the same moral category as those who spread medieval blood libels against innocent Jews. To say the regime of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has committed genocide is not merely to criticize a government, an army, or a political ideology. It is to accuse “the Jews.”

But there is a growing problem for Zionism and its favorite smear: the moral indignation of Jews.

According to a new AP-NORC poll, 30% of Jewish adults in the United States say Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Only 49% say it has not. Among religiously unaffiliated Jews, the share rises to about four in ten. Also, only about four in ten Jewish adults believe Israel’s continuing military operations in Gaza are justified, while roughly six in ten view Netanyahu unfavorably.

“Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them a great favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”

Two hundred and fifty years later, time and reason strongly suggest that the U.S. “defense” budget is out of control, unsustainable and absent of accountability.

Only the American people can rein it in.

The “defense of custom” in this case will come from the Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex (MICC) of which President Eisenhower warned us in 1961 in his farewell address, and drove home the consequences of in his famous “Cross of Iron” speech in 1953. In his address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Eisenhower said the following:

The attack was claimed by Yemen’s so-called “internationally recognized government,” which is based in Saudi Arabia and doesn’t have an air force of its own, meaning the strikes were almost certainly launched by Saudi warplanes.

In response, Ansar Allah’s military spokesman, Yahya Saree, vowed Yemen would hit back and said the era of “de-escalation”” between the two sides was over. A spokesman for the Saudi-led coalition later claimed that Saudi “air defenses intercepted a ballistic missile threat launched by the terrorist Houthi militia towards the southern region.”

Saree then announced that Yemeni forces targeted Saudi Arabia’s Abha International Airport with a “a number of ballistic missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.”

Dave DeCamp

For more information, contact

akeaton@antiwar.com

323-512-7095